Sunday, January 30, 2022

Say Again?

 "Say again" and "Come again" can be synonymous, depending on the context. Only the first is a potential synonym for "restatement", but when it comes to a restatement of copyright law --or any law-- one should not assume that the so-called restatement is true to the letter of the law.

As I remember it, Voltaire wrote in French, "If you would converse with me, you must first define your terms." Modern online dictionaries restate "would" as "wish to". 

By the way, Voltaire also wrote, "Toutes les histories anciennes, comme le disait un de nos beaux esprits, ne sont que des fables convenues."

Precis: History is no more than conventionally accepted fables (as one of our fine wits says).

And so, to a definition of the terms of copyright. Legal blogger Ava K. Doppelt, representing the law firm Allen Dyer Doppelt and Gilchrist PA has written a particularly clear an easy-to-understand explanation of copyright that begins with a quiz.

Everyone who thinks they know something about copyright should take that quick quiz.

Original link:

The trouble with the concept of copyright is that it has a dual purpose. Not only ia copyright intended to promote the advancement of art and science, but also  it is to incentivize scientists and artists to devote their time and talents to the arts and sciences, and to ensure that those who excel can earn enough by their creativity and skill to do their thing full time.

"Who in their right mind would write a book knowing that some tech company could nearly immediately publish an online version – without paying the author for the rights – because they think everyone in the world should be able to read that book?"

She opines that anyone who produces creative, copyrightable works ought to pay attention to the problems with the American Law Institute's Restatement of copyright project.  

Chris Castle of Music Tech Policy and also of Artists Rights Watch shares a telling transcript of an interview with a Spotify worker which goes to the heart of why--if one extrapolates-- there is a a desire in some quarters to restate copyright, for instance to make the case that streaming music, for example, is not copyright infringment.

"The Problem Is Not To Pay People Money"

The man says, "I think Taylor Swift doesn't need .00001 more a stream. The problem is this: Spotify was created to solve a problem. The problem was this: piracy and music distribution. The problem was to get artists' music out there. The problem was not to pay people money."

People who write books or make music, probably also like to buy food and pay the rent or mortgage. Copyright law is supposed to ensure that they earn enough from the works by being paid money! Streaming is proving disastrous for musicians, especially because of all the black boxes and frozen mechanicals.

All the best,

Friday, January 28, 2022

Karen S. Wiesner: Blurbs Series, Part 4: When to Write Your Blurbs

 Writer's Craft Article by Karen S. Wiesner 

Based on Writing Blurbs that Sizzle--And Sell! by Karen S. Wiesner 

Blurbs Series, Part 4:

When to Write Your Blurbs

This is the fourth of six posts focusing on writing effective blurbs for your books.

In the previous installment, we talked about how long blurbs should be and other basics about crafting blurbs. Let's continue. 

When to Write Your Blurbs 

No two authors are the same, and each one has preferences about when to write their blurbs. While I was working on my writing reference Three-Dimensional Fiction Writing (formerly titled Bring Your Fiction to Life: Crafting Three-Dimensional Stories with Depth and Complexity), one of my critique partners was blown away at the prospect of crafting the back cover blurb before a single word of the book had been written. It was inconceivable that this could even be possible, and it seemed backwards to her—writing the story was a prerequisite, in her opinion, since she could only be clear about what needed to go on the back cover after she wrote (and figured out) the story. 

After her comments, I can actually see that this makes a lot of sense for most unpublished or newly published authors. However, I'm on the opposite end of this. From my point of view, I can't imagine not starting a project with a blurb. Literally, it's the first thing I do once I have the original idea for a story (and/or series) and I’ve decided on a title. It's really what helps me solidify a story with characters and conflicts that haunt my mind. 

I usually write my blurbs years in advance of doing any other kind of writing on a book or series. The blurb finalizes the gist of the story and/or series clearly. Once the blurb is written, I can send it to my fiction publisher, knowing I have a solid story/series concept and I can, without question, write a full story based on it. She accepts the project based on this because she's learned from experience that, based on this blurb, I'll craft a thrilling story/series for her to publish…possibly years down the road from the time she first sees the proposal. Though I sometimes have to tweak the blurb(s) once the book or series are finished, my ideas for the story/series only become clear to me after I've written the (albeit long) blurbs, but I will say that it's a rare thing that any blurb is rewritten extensively after the book or series is finished. I believe it almost goes without saying that my long blurb is money in the bank when written in advance of any other writing on the project, given how it catapults the final story/series development and captures the essence of what will later become hundreds of pages when I begin writing that book or series. 

As I said, my initial back cover blurbs do tend to be fairly long, and I strongly prefer to start with the long version so the core of my story is encapsulated in these paragraphs. After the book is written, I'll whittle the long-form blurb (which can be around 450 words in length) down to something shorter that pops. I like to have a 150-word, 100-word, and 75-word blurb versions for each story so, whatever size is needed for various applications, I have something available. Those three sizes do seem to be what's expected for marketing and distribution purposes. I'm a firm believer that longer blurbs can be more effective than short ones, though my original 450-word ones are usually too long to be final back cover blurbs. (I will also note here that I strongly think it's always best to work directly from the original, full-length blurb when whittling instead of starting from scratch in any areas. Full-length blurbs are usually the strongest version of a blurb since it has everything it needs to be intriguing and compelling for readers, luring them into wanting to read the entire book.) 

So what's the best time to write a back cover blurb? As a general rule, professional published writers who are allowed to submit story/series proposals that can be accepted by their publishers long in advance of writing the book(s) should learn how to write a blurb before beginning any serious work on a project. For newer writers, the easiest way might be to wait until the story is written before attempting any kind of formal blurb, but give it a try beforehand at least once to see where it takes you. Even if you write 2000 words or even more, your story ideas will be much clearer and you can use that to write a more concise, less kitchen-sink blurb. 

Bottom line, when you write yours is completely up to you and your particular situation. That said, learning to do it early will immensely benefit you, your story (and series, if you're writing one), as well as your submission/promotion efforts. 

The axiom of writing blurbs that we mentioned earlier applies here: If your blurb doesn’t illicit intrigue or the desire to read the books or the series, it’s not effectively good. When I begin writing a new blurb (series or single title), I can’t imagine a more exciting time for me. Writing your own blurbs should bring forth so much excitement about writing the story/series you’ll barely be able to resist jumping into each one immediately. That's another reason for writing them early. 

While size shouldn't be a factor in writing effectively good blurbs, unfortunately it is these days. There are maximums so strongly encouraged they've become the norm. However, armed with the knowledge of what we're ideally shooting for in terms of length as well as the appropriate application (distribution or marketing--two completely different things), we can approach blurb sizing with true discernment. When to write blurbs depends on the author but writing them as soon as possible will benefit you, your story/series in crazy-good ways. There's no doubt that learning to write effectively good blurbs is critical to your success as an author. Remember, be sizzling in your blurbs if you want your books to sell! 

In Part 5, we'll talk about branding and blurbs. 

Karen S. Wiesner is the author of Writing Blurbs That Sizzle--And Sell!

Volume 7 of the 3D Fiction Fundamentals Collection 

Happy writing! 

Karen Wiesner is an award-winning, multi-genre author of over 140 titles and 16 series. Visit her here:

Thursday, January 27, 2022

Creative Fakelore for Fun and Enlightenment

The January-February 2022 issue of SKEPTICAL INQUIRER includes an article by statistical ecologist Charles G. M. Paxton, narrating his experiment of creating an imaginary water monster to masquerade as an authentic legend. He was inspired by an account of an eighteenth-century ghost in London that turned out to be a hoax promulgated in the 1970s. Paxton wondered whether his lake monster could gain similar credence. One intriguing thing about this experiement, to me, is that not only did his invented sightings get retold as genuine by multiple sources, new reports of alleged historical sightings sprang up, independent of any effort on his part.

He decided to create, not a generic sea serpent like Nessie in Loch Ness, but a "monstrous aquatic humanoid." He located it in two freshwater lakes in England's Lake District that, as far as he knew, had no existing tradition of monster lore. Paxton named this creature Eachy and devised a false etymology for the word. He also invented a nonexistent book to cite as a source. After he had an article about Eachy uploaded to Wikipedia, references to the monster began to spread. Although the Wikipedia article on Eachy no longer exists, the Cryptid Wiki has a straightforward page on him or it as a real piece of folklore:


The Cryptid Wiki piece mentions the earliest reported appearance of Eachy having occurred in 1873, an imaginary "fact" taken directly from Paxton's material. Moreover, in 2007 the monster sneaked into an actual nonfiction book, a cryptozoology guide by Ronan Coghlan. By January of 2008, Eachy T-shirts were being sold on the internet by someone unconnected to Paxton. At the time the Wikipedia Eachy page was deleted in 2019, it held the status of second-longest surviving hoax on that site.

What do we learn from this story? Paxton proposes that "the tale of the Eachy tells us the dangers of how Wikipedia can be subject to manipulation." As he mentions, however, in more recent years Wikipedia has tightened its standards and introduced more safeguards. On a broader scale, the Eachy hoax demonstrates the danger of how easily recorded history can be distorted or even fabricated from nothing, then accepted as fact. An important caution I'd note, as Paxton also alludes to, is the hazard of uncritically believing what appear to be multiple sources when in truth they're bouncing the same "facts" around in a self-referential echo chamber, repeating what they've picked up from previous sources in endless circularity. That phenomenon can be seen in a field I'm somewhat familiar with, scholarship on Bram Stoker's DRACULA. For instance, after an early biography suggested that Stoker might have died from complications of syphilis, numerous authors since then (in both nonfiction and novels) have accepted without question the truth of the assumption, "Bram Stoker had syphilis, which influenced the writing of DRACULA." The tale of Eachy also reinforces the obvious warning not to believe everything you read on the internet or even in books.

It's fascinating to me that a legend can be invented, disseminated, and perceived as authentic so quickly. Some authorities believe the story of Sawney Bean, the alleged patriarch of a sixteenth-century Scottish cannibal family, first reported in the NEWGATE CALENDAR centuries after the supposed events and repeated as fact in numerous publications since, was just such a fictional legend. And Sawney Bean's tale became deeply rooted in the public imagination long before the internet. In our contemporary electronic age, the chilling scenario in Orwell's NINETEEN EIGHTY-FOUR comes to mind. If history is whatever is written, what happens when history becomes so easy to rewrite? That's one good reason why, even if it ever became possible to digitize and make available on the web every book in existence, we should still hang onto the physical books. Ink on paper can't be altered at whim like bytes in an electronic file.

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt

Sunday, January 23, 2022

The Allowed Fool and the Law

In Tudor England, the only relatively safe way to tell truth to power (to coin a phrase), was to be reliably and consistently amusing about it. Kings, Dukes, dictators and tyrants have been understood to like a good laugh, and to very occasionally tolerate a really good joke at their own expense.

It helped for the longevity of the comedian if he could be excused for his impudence because it could be attributed to a harmless mental disorder.

An elegant modern term for such a repeating disorder might be "brain fart". 

College professor and Shakespearean scholar Steve Werkmeister writes an excellent blog about the allowed fool in Shakespeare's Twelfth Night (January 6th), and suggests some contemporary comedians who perform this role.

Some blogs age well. Observations made in June 2016 might seem even more perspicacious in January 2022.

The blog No Sweat Shakespeare offers a self-styled ultimate guide to Shakespeare's fools... and a heavy larding of irrelevant advertisements.

Drew Layton writes a fascinating analysis of a song lyric copyright case (in which the plaintiff did not prevail). The words in a sentence may be identical, but copyright depends on original expression that has been created independently and separately from another work.

The same analysis might apply to jokes.

The defence in the lyric case was very well served because the defendant had kept very good records of his creative process, and had sound recordings of early versions of the song, including experiments with a variety of phrases (beginning with "tell me that...") before settling on the phrase in question.

Titles cannot be copyrighted, for instance, but documenting ones experiments might be a good idea.  The same might apply to punchlines.

Intellectual Property attorney Milord A. Keshishian of the Milord Law Group wrote an interesting blog about copyright litigation between an extremly popular comedian (and others), and an author who published a complilation work of other peoples jokes.

The author made the monumental mistake of giving attribution by name to the comedians whose jokes she transcribed, published and distributed without permission.

One might use the search term "compilations of jokes" and find a great many YouTube videos of individuals telling jokes, but beware of appropriating them.

All the best,

 Rowena Cherry 





Friday, January 21, 2022

Karen S. Wiesner: Blurbs Series, Part 3: Crafting Blurb Basics

Writer's Craft Article by Karen S. Wiesner 

Based on Writing Blurbs that Sizzle--And Sell! by Karen S. Wiesner 

Blurbs Series, Part 3:

Crafting Blurb Basics 

This is the third of six posts focusing on writing effective blurbs for your books. 

In Part 3, we talked about writing series blurbs. Let's continue. 

It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single author in possession of a good book must be in want of a blurb. But writing blurbs is hard and it's something a lot of authors put off until the last possible minute. Two of the most basic blurb questions that might be circling right now are: How long should a blurb be? What's the best time to write a blurb? 

First, we should establish that writing blurbs requires an entirely different mindset than writing stories. That might be a good reason for not writing one as soon as you've finished writing the book. Give yourself time away, just enough so you've still got the story firmly in mind, but you've gained sufficient distance to allow yourself to go at blurbing like a fitness coach to make it lean and mean. 

Second, yeah, I'm going there: Facts are facts, and the fact is some authors are just not good at writing blurbs…for whatever reason. Too many think that just because a blurb is generally short, it's inconsequential, as evidenced by this quote from Ben Cameron in his 10 Top Tips on How to Write the Best Book Blurb article: "You've just put your feet up when you get a reminder from the designer that they still need text for the back cover. Another small decision at the end of a long line of decisions, you knock something together in a few minutes and send it off. You may have just doomed your 75,000-word masterpiece…" Did he learn to regret his former blasé attitude about blurbs? Probably. 

Others are simply too deeply involved with their own work--therefore, everything is important and must be mentioned. Those authors need to look at the story from a reader's perspective and have a disciplined method for getting down to the heart of the story. Some authors can learn to be better or even good at blurb writing with a solid process and practice behind them.    

Finally, there are authors who are given literally no say in what makes it on or into their back cover blurbs. The publishing house does that work, and sometimes that's a relief and actually carries rewards. Other times, especially when blurbs are misleading or just downright wrong, that may lead to a lot of embarrassment or even loss of sales. The best case scenario would be for the one who knows the book best (the author) to write the first draft of his own blurb then send it over to a professional blurbologist (that's a real thing!) to revise into something sizzling, and lastly, the blurb goes to a marketing expert to finish it off with whatever a blurb needs promotion-wise. But, let's face it, that situation doesn’t happen too often these days. Learning how to do it yourself is probably the way to go for the vast majority. 

There are techniques (discussed in-depth in my book and workshops titled Writing Blurbs That Sizzle--And Sell! as well as touched on in my many articles on the topic of blurbs) that can help and may even infuse you with the same enthusiasm I have for writing blurbs. I am wildly, wonderfully in love with writing, revising and evaluating book blurbs--for my own books and for the books of other authors, regardless of the genre. Even the most shockingly underwhelming blurbs I've been asked to write or revise have thrilled me with their challenge. For most authors, that's inconceivable. 

Let's go over the two most basic questions authors have when it comes to writing blurbs: How long they can and should be and when to write them. 

How Long Should a Blurb Be? 

Ultimately, it doesn't matter a whit if a blurb is long or short or somewhere in-between. We have a misconception these days that being short by definition makes a blurb good and effective while a long blurb is by default in opposition of that, but both flavor-of the-day trends are illusions that you can't afford to rest on. You can have a thousand word blurb that's so amazing readers devour it and immediately want to read the book just as you might see a short, punchy blurb that's incredibly well-written but doesn't make someone want to read the book. Hence, effectively good means it's both well-written and makes a person want to read the story inside the pages, not just the back--want to enough to actually pay money to do it. If a blurb isn't good enough to make someone want to open the book and read, it's not effectively good. An effectively good blurb either is effectively good in making a reader open the book or it's not. That's the bottom line, and all that matters. A blurb can be good and not effective, or effective and not good, but either it's both or it won't work. End of story. 

As we alluded to previously, there's a huge trend going on these days about short blurbs. I personally believe distributors and a certain high-profile publishing company associated with one of the major book distributors in the world is behind this trend. Many publishers, printers, books packagers, distributors and book promote websites actually do have a limit on how many words can be included as a description. You might have noticed at Amazon, if you want to read any more than the first, say, five sentences, you have to click "read more"--twice, if you can believe that!--to get the full amount that was allowed to be put in by the publisher or author. At Lulu, a printer, you're given a very small amount of space for your blurb and you can't go over that maximum no matter how much you might want to (and you will want to!). 

I don't deny that if your blurb is short and punchy, it’s practically guaranteed to be intriguingly memorable. But it's a fact that short is not always best. A too-short blurb may be less than dazzling. Instead of being memorable, it can lack details to capture true interest in readers. Once, I was revising blurbs for two different authors. One gave me about five total sentences. The other gave me five long paragraphs. Guess which one I enjoyed the most? Yes, I've admitted I prefer long blurbs, but with the short blurb, I couldn't find anything to connect to. Not enough information was given for me to feel any intrigue and desire to read more. The five long paragraphs weren't enough to satisfy me for the other book. I loved everything I read and I was just eating it up! But, as a blurbologist, I knew it was far too long for the average reader, so I did suggest cuts. My point is, an effectively good blurb isn't going to fit into any word count minimums or maximums because the point isn't about whether it's long or short. All that really matters when it comes to blurb size is whether it's effectively good. 

Genre will play a part in the size of your back cover blurb. Science fiction, fantasy, and historical books (especially if part of a series) may have longer back cover and series blurbs: up to four paragraphs instead of the standard one or two. That's because the blurb may have to make sense of whole worlds, cultures and philosophies, which, in many cases may seem vastly different from what a modern reader is used to. Less weighty genres set in time periods and worlds modern people are accustomed to--such as romance, suspense, general fiction, maybe even speculative stories--rarely have more than two paragraphs that make up the back cover blurb. So, here's a go-to list of our size figures for each blurb type: 

A high-concept blurb is rarely more than a single sentence long but can be up to two sentences in length. Actual word count is certainly not a factor in this unless your sentences are long enough to be shocking. Most are rarely more than 20 words long. 

A back cover blurb can be anywhere from one to four paragraphs long. Back in the day when there were only print copies of books, they used to have to fit blurbs solely on the back cover of that physical book (whether it was a mass market paperback, trade or another size). Depending on the size of the paperback, 200-450 words was about the maximum comfortable fit on a back cover. Anything longer and the font would have to be made smaller, or less "blank" space would be available for margins. It is possible to fit about 425 words on a trade size paperback and still have it look attractive and be fairly readable. I've done it with my own. But, as we said, this can be at the expense of a largely readable font size and open space.  

A series blurb can also be anywhere from one to four paragraphs in length--but preferably one unless it's for a genre that requires a bit more room, as we've already covered. 

Between the high-concept, story and series blurbs, you generally have an absolute maximum of 450 total words to use, but 250 or less for all three combined is recommended. 

Promotional considerations are the major and the main reason for having short blurbs. I don't believe a blurb that includes only high-concept blurb will ever be effective in making the reader jump right to buying the book. With that kind of thinking, authors have skipped an absolutely vital step. This is very definitely a progression. The reason for a high-concept blurb is to lure the readers in with a punch of intrigue so they'll want to read the rest of the blurb (which will hopefully make them want to read the book). So the high-concept blurb tempts the reader to read the back cover blurb and the back cover blurb incites the reader to make the commitment to read the story. When I see a book promotion that has a high-concept blurb that really speaks to me, makes me want to know more, I'll go looking for the back cover blurb. I rarely skip right to buying the book because I need to know more in order to make the commitment to buy. Think of it as an equation (the arrow stands for "leads to"): 

High-concept blurb PUNCH --> Back cover blurb to find out more information --> Commitment to buy and read the book 

Authors need to be aware of this progression to be effective in distributing and marketing their books. If you don't have any limitations, go with the most effectively good combination of all three blurbs for the proper application, whether it be distribution or marketing. 

In Part 4, we'll talk about when to write your blurbs. 

Karen S. Wiesner is the author of Writing Blurbs That Sizzle--And Sell!

Volume 7 of the 3D Fiction Fundamentals Collection 

Happy writing! 

Karen Wiesner is an award-winning, multi-genre author of over 150 titles and 16 series. Visit her here:

Thursday, January 20, 2022

Presently Tense

Does anybody really like fiction narrated in the present tense? Apparently, to my bafflement, many people actually do, since that device seems to be a currently popular fad. Not only do authors write it, lots of editors accept it. Of the two most recent Ellen Datlow anthologies I read, each contains multiple present-tense selections. The January-February issue of THE MAGAZINE OF FANTASY AND SCIENCE FICTION, which I just finished reading, includes twelve stories, of which five are told in present tense. To skew the balance further, one of those is the longest piece in the issue. Only one story strikes me as possibly justified in its narrative choice, being framed as a sequence of day-by-day news-as-it-unfolds reports.

Many years ago, I read a horror novella that enthralled me except for one feature: It was written in present tense and second person. "You walk to the top of the barren hill and find the ruins of an ancient stone circle. . . ." kind of thing. (Just an example, not a quote. The bizarre narrative style is the only specific thing I recall.) I've seen second-person-present-tense work very effectively in an occasional short story. At novella length, it was excruciating. An author I follow on Facebook dislikes present-tense fiction so thoroughly that it's an automatic downcheck for her. While I don't go that far, in my opinion present tense has only a limited justifiable use. It works well in the aforementioned rare short stories in second person. And if an author wants to leave open the possibility of a first-person protagonist's death, present tense can discourage the reader from meta-thinking along the lines of, "He can't die, because he's telling what happened in the past." (Only in a short story, though, not inflicted on us for the length of a novel or even a novella.) There are few other circumstances in which present-tense narrative doesn't annoy me. Sometimes it makes sense when used to distinguish current action from flashbacks, as Stephen King does in his recent thriller BILLY SUMMERS. I didn't mind it too much in that book, although I don't think it was necessary.

Why do fiction writers use present tense? I assume the idea is that telling the tale as if it's happening at this moment is supposed to enhance suspense or create a feeling of immediacy. It's probably meant to give the audience a sense of being immersed in the action. In my experience as a reader, that style has the opposite effect. Present-tense narration draws attention to itself and away from the story. It most often generates distance rather than emotional involvement. Conventional past-tense storytelling is "transparent" because it's what we've been conditioned to expect. When reading, we look through it, not at it. My advice, for what it's worth: As a writer, don't mess with what traditionally works unless you have a strong, specific reason for the change.

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt

Sunday, January 16, 2022

Sauce For The Gander

Sauce for the gander...

In other words, “Lube for the schlong  but not so much for the cooch” (my words) is discriminatory and wrong, but it seems to approximate to the advertising policy on Facebook regarding adult products or services. The Center for Intimacy Justice cries foul.

Pleasure is verboten. So, too, are remedies for feminine maladies that Menlo Park men would rather not contemplate.

Legal blogger Jeff Greenbaum for Frankfurt Kurnit Klein andSelz PC looks into the complaint.

Original Link:


Applicable to sauce with a different meaning (though, I will not get around to hooch), divorce and family law specialist and very fine blogger, Kirk C. Stange Esquire of the Stange LawFirm PC  counsels lawyers on how to get social media likes and follows.

Original link: 

Kirk C. Stange's methods, rationale and advice should work just as well for authors, especially the suggestions about blatant self promotion. He looks like an interesting person to follow for any author interested in source material for divorce or family law /family court matters.

Saucy e-book pirates bite the dust in court.

Ukraine is home to the saucy  e-book pirating site KISS LIBRARY, which was sued by Amazon, PRH, and Authors Guild on behalf of 12 authors  in 2020 for pirating e-books at discounted prices  under,,, and other domain names.  The court recently awarded 7.8 million in statutory damages to the plaintiffs.

Let’s hope Ukraine makes sure that the damages are paid promptly, and that their pirate sites are shut down.

Speaking of money, January is the time to send out 1099-MISC and 1099-NEC.

Authors, if in the course of your business you paid your webmaster or webmistress (whom I suppose the new, Microsoft Officious app may now suggest we now call webexpert and weblover ) $600 or more, you need to fill out a 1099-NEC.  Copy A must go to the IRS with a filing form 1096. Copy B must go to the webexpert or weblover.

Ditto if you paid a lawyer.

Incorporated businesses usually do not need 1099-NECs. PCs, LLCs, and individuals do.

This $600 threshold is probably why the IRS is now empowered to look at bank accounts, so it is probably more important than ever before to send out these forms and fill them out correctly.

Original forms are free from the IRS, and also from some public libraries.  If you have fewer than 10 forms, and do not own a typewriter or file-online account, you may use handwriting as long as you remember to use block printing, in black ink, and do not run over the outlines of the boxes on the forms.

All the best,

Rowena Cherry 


EPIC Award winner, Friend of ePublishing for Crazy Tuesday